Rabbit, Run by John Updike (.....im losing the will)

im only half way, but its taken a good 5 hours to get that far. (maybe im just a slow reader)

his prose is great, very nicely written and artstic, and sometimes i find myself getting sucked in, then rabbit says something totally stupid and i want to throw the book out of the window. i can see the appeal of a morally shady character, especially put in his situation, but not only is he pathetically hopeless and arrogant, but he doesn't do anything, nothing happens. really nothing happens VERY slowly, which is the extra salt in the wounds.

that restaurant scene for ten pages, could have been told in 2. a whole long page deicated to what was on the radio....wasn't need AT ALL. and also the scene with ruth in her apartment. and i have never known a night of romance written over so many pages. its just slow. i can take slow if i care about a character or two, or if their is a major plot line slowly unfolding, but right now im just fed up.

I want to make it clear that i love dark, tragic, and even upsetting stories, books that get me emotionally involved always are my favourites. but this isn;t tragic, or upsetting for me, because i dont care about harry. if he got run over by a car in the next ten pages i would probably be relieved. i just cant wrap my head around it.

im not making this topic to be convinced to carry on reading it, its clear that its just not my thing. however what i really wanted was to get other peoples opinion on why they like it or why they dont, and maybe could shed some light on why its such a critic's darling. is it down to the prose? or were men like rabbit angstrom more believable and acceptable in the 60s?

hope to hear some opinions on this, as book i dont enjoy always laves a sour taste in my mouth, especially when its considered a classic,

Something similar happened to me when I read it for the first time, I abandoned the book circa at page 150, but in the following weeks I noticed that the (slow but thick) story and the beauty of the writing were stuck into my mind, so I decided to finish it, then to read it da capo; now the entire Rabbit series is one of my favourite works. And the first book is a masterpiece, why? I have never read a better novel about the middle-class and its social conventions and the trouble a young man has to go through to become part of it and how such a process is an inevasible one. Then I guess it has an added value for me - being an Italian - since it shows a side of America you don't see in the movies.

i see your point.

and i do read for long periods of the book, even when im annoyed with it. so maybe i will have a similar experience in the future, as his writing in technical terms is very nice. rolls very well.

tackling something with grit and realism is good, in fact its great. however the content within is too thin for me, and filled with characters that while some are realistic, most are caricatures of the morally inverted, they just dont play truthfully in my mind. rabbit is TOO ignorant and arrogant, yet still has this clean living philosiphy which is a direct and hardly believable contrast considering his acid personality.

add in the fact that updike definitely has a veneer of arrogance in his own writing. he is very talented, but as i mentioned in the first post, noone cares whats on the radio, never mind a whole page of it. and his scenes last way too long. if by chance i do get interested in what might happen ahead, 10 pages later, when i am still in the same place, i wonder why i got my hopes up.

Why does Updike sometimes take a whole page to describe what could be summed up in a line or two?

It's his way of illustrating middle-aged ennui - the lower middle-class, morally deficient, amoral Rabbit going through a mid-life crisis that has got him in its grip - and he is incapable of making a rational decision or taking back control of his life.

And Updike described the whole process with brilliantly restrained wit.

when you put it like that then i do totally get the point of view.

however what is making have these opinions, that most people who enjoyed the book could easily argue with is simply that i hate rabbit.

i dont just dislike him, i hate him. and in real life whenever there is a person i hate i simply shut off my ties to him.

that is probably what my mind is doing subconciously now, i hate him, so instead of being frustrated with him yet still enjoying the story and viewpoint in literary form, i am simply unconnected from him in every way, therefore i find 10+ pages of inner monologue totally and utterly uninteresting, no matter how good the prose is.

i see both of your points, can i ask, how old you both are? i am settled with why people like book now now, thanks to your well worded posts, still id like to see if its something to do with the impatience of youth (although 23 isn't young really :p)

oh and if you hadn't gathered im kind of stubborn, if i was easy going i could see myself fighting my way through the novel. but it like forcing me to go to dinner with my worst enemy in my mind right now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grechzoo

can i ask, how old you both are?

---

ouch! well lets just say I'm closer to 60 than 50 - but I was still in my 20's when I first read 'Rabbit Run' and 'Rabbit Redux'.
I suppose getting hold of a novel in the UK that gave an Americanised insight into the male psyche, and the 'fun' one could have if one cut family ties and abandoned the moral map was the attraction at that time in my life.
I was also blown away by 'The Dice Man' (Luke Rhineheart) - a more extreme, and amoral novel on a similar theme. Put it down to exploring the dark side of humanity without taking the risk of trying them out first-hand.

And I do sympathise with you, struggling with a novel when you despise the main protagonist. Perhaps you will become more sympathetic towards him later in your life. But don't let Rabit put you off Updike - read 'The Centaur'. It's a gem.

H

i will consider it (will try to get it out at a library) :)

in fact i am certain that at some point in the future i will probably return to it. because actually reading it when the book was in my hands wasn't tough, it was just my indifference that made me dread picking it back up after a break.

for now though i have started american pastoral, and already im feeling a little more refreshed. if this novel lets me down i might have to have a short break from reading altogether ;)

if you spot a trend then yeah, im mostly sticking with the big american authors because of some great novels i have read recently. will broaden my horizons when i have had my fix.

SF is ok too - when you need a break from heavier stuff and a little escapism.

I was always a big fan of Azimov and Bradbury - not so much now perhaps. But whatever you end up reading, classics or pulp fiction it's never a wasted exercise.

Be well, H

oh yeah, it was ender's game that got me into reading, so naturally i stuck with that genre for a while.

but after reading all the pretty horses by mccarthy i just started researching and buying modern and classical general fiction. i have a massive list saved on my computer compiled from tons of lists, reviews, recommendatiosn etc. so i dont think i will be going back to sf+f for a while.

the reason i loved sf+f was the escapism as you said. but imo gen fiction has tons of excapism too. all fiction does really, even non-fiction. unless you are reading your own autobiography, technically everything is escapism if its well written. ;)